MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A highly automated moving object detection package

2003· article· en· W2050563626 on OpenAlexaffabout
Jean-Marc Petit, Matthew J. Holman, H. Schöll, J. J. Kavelaars, Brett Gladman

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicCCD and CMOS Imaging Sensors
Canadian institutionsHerzberg Institute of Astrophysics
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLimiting magnitudeObject detectionLimitingPipeline (software)Set (abstract data type)PhysicsData setMagnitude (astronomy)False positive rateArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceOperator (biology)AlgorithmComputer visionPattern recognition (psychology)TelescopeAstrophysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the deployment of large CCD mosaic cameras and their use in large-scale surveys to discover Solar system objects, there is a need for fast detection algorithms that can handle large data loads in a nearly automatic way. We present here an algorithm that we have developed. Our approach, by using two independent detection algorithms and combining the results, maintains high efficiency while producing low false-detection rates. These properties are crucial in order to reduce the operator time associated with searching these huge data sets. We have used this algorithm on two different mosaic data sets obtained using the CFH12K camera at the Canada–France–Hawaii Telescope (CFHT). Comparing the detection efficiency and false-detection rate of each individual algorithm with the combination of both, we show that our approach decreases the false detection rate by a factor of a few hundred to a thousand, while decreasing the ‘limiting magnitude’ (where the detection rate drops to 50 per cent) by only 0.1–0.3 mag. The limiting magnitude is similar to that of a human operator blinking the images. Our full pipeline also characterizes the magnitude efficiency of the entire system by implanting artificial objects in the data set. The detection portion of the package is publicly available.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.058
Threshold uncertainty score0.196

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0580.056

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.004
GPT teacher head0.180
Teacher spread0.176 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations42
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical SocietySame topicCCD and CMOS Imaging SensorsFrench-language works237,207